Model comparison
Qwen1.5-32B vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen1.5-32B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads 51.3 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B and 84.8% for Qwen3.6 35B-A3B.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.5 | 37.6 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.49 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 37.2 (#196)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 35.8% |
| WeirdML | — | 34.5% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.3% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1155 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 42% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen1.5-32B: —, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 22.1 (#134)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 23% |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 28.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 41.6% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1130 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 22% |
| DTBench | — | 73.9% |
| LMCA | — | 29.7% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 44.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.93 |
Math Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 38.9 (#121)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 20.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1155 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 51.3 (#68)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 30.7% | 84.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1126 | — |
| MMLU | 74.4% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1106 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1177 | — |
| LMArena French | 1101 | — |
| LMArena German | 1058 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1027 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1008 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1073 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1089 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1146 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-32B | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1083 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1140 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-32B better than Qwen3.6 35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-32B or Qwen3.6 35B-A3B better for coding?
Qwen3.6 35B-A3B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.2 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-32B and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen1.5-32B has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B has 14.